So you contingently agree with the couple of minor contributions I've made, but then go on to ask a rhetorical, and Id wager unanswerable question.
No wonder this is a circular argument.

But if you want to add some weght to your argument feel to come back with anything remotely assembling stats to back up your couple of claims that its worse in respect to Govt stories

Or you can help me try and square this circle from Twitter today (Ponsonby)

Sarah Smith: "Last week over one hundred thousand patients waited more than four hours to be seen."
--
There were 25,865 attendances at Emergency Departments across Scotland last week. Source. https://t.co/dcIm4ZsFXn

https://t.co/MMi27oN72T

--
Yet:
According to her figures, 78% were seen in the target 4 hours. Therefore her "100,000" represents only 22% of total A&E attendances. So total attendance works out at over 454,000, i.e about 8.5% of Scottish population.

--
Genuine question.. I'm open to any explanation

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.

So you contingently agree with the couple of minor contributions I've made, but then go on to ask a rhetorical, and Id wager unanswerable question.
No wonder this is a circular argument.

But if you want to add some weght to your argument feel to come back with anything remotely assembling stats to back up your couple of claims that its worse in respect to Govt stories

Or you can help me try and square this circle from Twitter today (Ponsonby)

Sarah Smith: "Last week over one hundred thousand patients waited more than four hours to be seen."
--
There were 25,865 attendances at Emergency Departments across Scotland last week. Source. https://t.co/dcIm4ZsFXn

--
Yet:
According to her figures, 78% were seen in the target 4 hours. Therefore her "100,000" represents only 22% of total A&E attendances. So total attendance works out at over 454,000, i.e about 8.5% of Scottish population.

--
Genuine question.. I'm open to any explanation

I haven't seen the Sarah Smith piece on BBC England but this is possibly where the 100,000 comes from

Last month, BBC analysis of NHS data showed that fewer patients in Scotland were waiting longer than four hours in A&E than they did in 2012/3 in contrast to England where the number had more than doubled.

It found England had a 155% rise in long waits between 2012/3 and this year, up to 2.5 million a year.

Hospitals in Wales and Northern Ireland also saw an increase over the period.

In Scotland, the number of patients waiting more than four hours fell by 9% to just over 100,000.

The 100,000 appears to be for the whole of December, not last week of December.

#Persevered
Scotland can be a beacon, within these islands and beyond, for a socially just and sustainable society. Whilst there are many priorities which will require independence, there is also much that can and must be done now by the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government.

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.

So it'll just be another honest mistake then.
Fair enough cheers.

Just wish they weren't as regular as they are, and anecdotally it seems the vast majority are against the govt to me.

I haven't seen the Sarah Smith piece on BBC England but this is possibly where the 100,000 comes from

The 100,000 appears to be for the whole of December, not last week of December.

The 100,000 is for more than December.

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.

Having just revered the clip again. The same quoted figure is given by the news presenter in her intro and by Sarah Smyth in her piece.. so Not just the one genuine mistake it would appear.

No wonder cynicism levels are through the roof.
People have as much faith in Craig Thompson..!!

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.

If an organisation had come out fundamentally challening my organisation and i felt it was unfounded, i would also seek to raise it at the highest possible levels.

That doesnt prove anything, other than the author fept he had rattled the BBC

Rather than take the opinion ofnour friendly, local Hibs net SNP political education officer, lets see what Blair Jenkins thinks about this issue, habing worked at senior levels on both sides -

"Mr Jenkins said the broadcast media had an important role to play. He added that as a former BBC Scotland news boss, he very rarely saw "deliberate bias" and he did not believe there was "systematic bias" at the BBC.

He told the committee: "You see mistakes being made and mistakes are being made because resources are being cut, particularly at BBC Scotland.

"As someone who held a senior role in BBC Scotland I am very aware of the strength of feeling in the journalistic community that they are over stretched.

"I am more aware of opportunities being missed, programmes not being done and issues not being treated with enough depth."

I thought you might have taken the opportunity to move into 2018, having left all that pish behind. Perhaps you should have posted it in the baby box thread.

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.

#Persevered
Scotland can be a beacon, within these islands and beyond, for a socially just and sustainable society. Whilst there are many priorities which will require independence, there is also much that can and must be done now by the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government.

Well you may have read it, but you appear to have missed the point.
Which is that the BBC's use of that interview is a clear example of bias, or failing that, lack of professionalism.
If they had done any background checking they should have identified the man as someone with an axe to grind against the Scottish Government and the SNP in particular.

But I'm not going to engage further, because I suspect you're just trolling for an argument.